this post was submitted on 12 Mar 2025
14 points (100.0% liked)

Hardware

1386 readers
222 users here now

All things related to technology hardware, with a focus on computing hardware.

Rules (Click to Expand):

  1. Follow the Lemmy.world Rules - https://mastodon.world/about

  2. Be kind. No bullying, harassment, racism, sexism etc. against other users.

  3. No Spam, illegal content, or NSFW content.

  4. Please stay on topic, adjacent topics (e.g. software) are fine if they are strongly relevant to technology hardware. Another example would be business news for hardware-focused companies.

  5. Please try and post original sources when possible (as opposed to summaries).

  6. If posting an archived version of the article, please include a URL link to the original article in the body of the post.

Some other hardware communities across Lemmy:

Icon by "icon lauk" under CC BY 3.0

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
14
UserBenchmark bashes AMD GPUs and claims they lack real-world performance (www.tomshardware.com)
submitted 2 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
11 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

AMD's Radeon RX 9070 series GPUs are a welcome addition to the GPU market, assuming you can get one at MSRP. AMD has faced fewer complications than Nvidia's lackluster GPU launch, marred by a shortage of supplies. UserBenchmark has not taken lightly to AMD's and the tech media's supposed antics. In its purported review of the RX 9070 XT, one of the best graphics cards, the website claims that Radeon GPUs fall short in real-world performance while failing to mention the GPU in question even once.

For the uninitiated, UserBenchmark (UB) is infamous in the tech landscape for its radical perspectives versus AMD, which it commonly refers to as "Advanced Marketing Devices." For context, it once recommended readers purchase a Core i5-13600K over the Ryzen 7 9800X3D, asserting, and I quote, "Spending more on a gaming CPU is often pointless."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

I'd argue there are MUCH better alternatives (cine, pass, 3Dmark, hwbot, cpuz, et al) for that that are equally if not easier to use. Furthermore, installing anything on a machine from these nutties is begging to be hacked (best case scenario).

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

One useful thing about userbench is that you can benchmark all components at the same time to identify a massive discrepancy between median performance for your component and what you're seeing in your build.

I treat userbench less as a benchmark and more as a high level validation system. Just to make sure there are no critical issues that are messing up my new build.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Passmark has this feature as well, and is much more reputable.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Ooh, nice, I've been looking for a replacement ever since UserBenchmark locked the benchmark behind a paywall and a ridiculous timewaster captcha.

It was a handy way to just make sure everything was working properly - like my BIOS is being a dumbass and deciding to run my RAM at half speed for some unknown reason, and not letting the new CPU boost to full potential.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

M8, c'mon, people are taking their time to recommend you actual benchmarks that are somewhat transparent, reputable and provide all the functions that userbenchmark is supposed to have. Shit, even Aida64 is better than userbench. The least you could do is not spread complete asinine takes and have people install literal spyware from a bunch of loons that clearly make a buck out of fooling idiots to install their software and selling their data. FFS